Total agreement. On 10 Mar 2017 6:26 p.m., "Ralph Goers" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> This is exactly why we need one dev list. These last two responses dropped > the other lists. This is a horrible way to have discussions that affect > all the sub projects. > > Ralph > > > On Mar 10, 2017, at 9:11 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'd love to see more unified configurations in all the subprojects. Gary > mentioned that as an idea for log4cxx as that would make it useful for his > use case where they're using both Java and C++ in various projects. > > While the programming languages in use here (Java, .NET, PHP, and C++) > aren't really compatible with each other, having similar architectures and > plugin systems could help a bit in this regard. Having more inclusive > conversations about this would be great. > > On 10 March 2017 at 04:29, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com> > wrote: > >> I think that a vast majority of our users only uses one of the languages >> we support, and therefore only are interested in one of the subprojects. >> >> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com> w >> rote: >> >>> We had once the discussion that we wanted all Apache Logging projects to >>> become very similar in their usage, starting with the same or a very >>> similar configuration. Given that we should aim towards one Apache Logging >>> specification and several Apache Logging specification implementations in >>> the form of Apache Logging subprojects. That means all the devs for all >>> subprojects have to talk more. To me this is a good reasons to merge the >>> dev mailing lists. Further I don't see why the same use case should not >>> apply to the user mailing lists, too. Those mailing lists see very low >>> traffic but all of them need a larger audience. Just quoting the last few >>> messages of two user mailing lists I follow: >>> >>> log4j-user: the last topic came in a week ago, the topic before that >>> about two weeks ago >>> log4net-user: the last topic came in 24 hours ago and the topic before >>> that a month ago >>> >>> Cheers >>> On 2017-03-09 19:24, Ralph Goers wrote: >>> >>> We use general as mainly an announcement list for topics that might be >>> of general interest to all logging projects. Generally, these are just >>> release announcements. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 10:37 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Yeah, I agree that the user lists can remain separate as it doesn't >>> cause any issues currently. The main idea here is whether we should merge >>> the dev lists into one, or if we need a common dev list for all devs to >>> subscribe to (general@ doesn't sound appropriate, but I don't know what >>> that list is for). >>> >>> On 9 March 2017 at 10:26, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> You should note that while we consider all votes only PMC votes are >>>> “binding”. I don’t think that changes much however. >>>> >>>> From a PMC perspective I have to say that keeping the user’s lists >>>> separate isn’t likely to be an issue as most of the things that would need >>>> to be discussed would be on a dev list anyway. >>>> >>>> Ralph >>>> >>>> On Mar 9, 2017, at 2:45 AM, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> The votes are way too scattered over the different mailing lists so >>>> that I didn't even find my own vote. ;-) Therefore I'm trying to summarize >>>> the current state of the vote: >>>> >>>> log4j-dev@, log4php-dev@, log4net-dev@, log4cxx-dev@ -> >>>> d...@logging.apache.org >>>> >>>> Matt Sicker: +1 >>>> Ralph Goers: +1 >>>> Stefan Bodewig: +1 >>>> Sven Rautenverg: -1 >>>> Thorsten Schöning: -0 >>>> Ivan Habunek: -0 >>>> Dominik Psenner: +1 >>>> Remko Popma: +1 >>>> Mikael Ståldal: +0 >>>> >>>> Totals so far: >>>> +1: 5 >>>> +0: 1 >>>> -0: 2 >>>> -1: 1 >>>> >>>> log4j-user@, log4php-user@, log4net-user@, log4cxx-user@, general@ -> >>>> u...@logging.apache.org >>>> >>>> Matt Sicker: -1 >>>> Ralph Goers: +1 >>>> Stefan Bodewig: -1 >>>> Sven Rautenverg: -1 >>>> Thorsten Schöning: -0 >>>> Ivan Habunek: -0 >>>> Dominik Psenner: +1 >>>> Remko Popma: +1 >>>> Mikael Ståldal: -1 >>>> >>>> Totals so far: >>>> +1: 3 >>>> +0: 0 >>>> -0: 2 >>>> -1: 4 >>>> >>>> Sorry to anyone who's vote is missing. >>>> >>>> On 2017-03-08 05:20, Matt Sicker wrote: >>>> >>>> I may be missing some mailing lists considering I just subscribed to >>>> half of them less than five minutes ago. >>>> >>>> This is a vote to merge the various Apache Logging Services mailing >>>> lists. The proposal is to combine them as follows: >>>> >>>> log4j-dev@, log4php-dev@, log4net-dev@, log4cxx-dev@ -> >>>> d...@logging.apache.org >>>> log4j-user@, log4php-user@, log4net-user@, log4cxx-user@, general@ -> >>>> u...@logging.apache.org >>>> >>>> commits@ and private@ remain the same as before. >>>> >>>> The proposal would also suggest that the old emails become aliases for >>>> the combined email names so as not to lose any future emails. To >>>> distinguish between projects, a subject tag can be added such as: >>>> >>>> [java] >>>> [net] >>>> [cxx] >>>> [php] >>>> >>>> Though I wouldn't think such a tag is required, though it should help >>>> in gaining the attention of the appropriate audience. >>>> >>>> Voting: >>>> >>>> +1: Yes, combine the mailing lists! >>>> +0: Go ahead, don't care that much. >>>> -0: Don't like it, but not vetoing it. >>>> -1: No, don't do that! I have a better idea! >>>> >>>> This vote follows the same "lazy consensus" (at least 3 +1 binding, no >>>> -1/vetoes) we use for general releases and whatnot. The vote will be open >>>> for at least 72 hours. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> [image: MagineTV] >> >> *Mikael Ståldal* >> Senior software developer >> >> *Magine TV* >> mikael.stal...@magine.com >> Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com >> <http://www.magine.com/> >> >> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this >> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message >> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may >> not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, >> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply >> email. >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > > >
